Meeting of the Minds, a global knowledge sharing platform, spoke with Dan Chatman of UC Berkeley’s Department of City and Regional Planning about the integration of paratransit services with Bus Rapid Transit around the world. Dr. Chatman studies travel behavior and the built environment, residential and workplace location choice, “smart growth” and municipal fiscal decision making, and the connections between public transportation, immigration and the economic growth of cities.

What kind of research are you doing with VREF’s support?

We are looking at Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), which is a publicly-run new public transit service that runs along high-volume corridors with service characteristics that make it faster than ordinary buses, but is usually much cheaper than passenger rail service. Specifically, we are studying issues around bringing in BRT while integrating pre-existing transportation services that are privately provided in many cities around the world. These services include minibuses run by private drivers who stop at multiple and flexible pick-up locations along their routes. These bus services take different forms around the world; they’re called “colectivos” in parts of Latin America, “matatus” in Kenya, and “kombis” in South Africa. This kind of privately-provided public transit is often referred to overall as “paratransit,” although in the US, paratransit refers to specialized services for the elderly and people with disabilities. Also in the US, public transit is almost exclusively run by public agencies; any privately operated services are usually done under a very tight contract. This not the case elsewhere in the world, especially in Latin America and Africa where our work is focused.

There are several good reasons to implement Bus Rapid Transit. It overcomes safety issues with private operators who may be unscrupulous, involved in organized crime, not paying their drivers very much, or running vehicles that are unsafe or poorly maintained. Over-competition and drivers easily joining private service consortiums can also increase the number of vehicles clogging up roads, leading to more congestion. These problems have been used as justifications for bringing in BRT.

BRT is presumed to be an improvement to existing public transportation. However, it involves big changes – both institutionally and in the way service is implemented – and requires big investment. Also, high quality service tends to be provided along a limited number of radial axis trunk lines, which requires additional feeder services to get to and from the stations. The switch-over from privately provided transit services to a centrally provided system is definitely beneficial to some people but could be problematic for others.

It sounds as though the benefits and challenges of Bus Rapid Transit aren’t always straight forward. How are you finding out what makes a BRT system successful?

We’re studying what is actually happening in places where BRT has been implemented. We’re looking at the before and after situation for people, the issues, the improvements, the problems, how BRT was rolled out, and how it is structured in terms of services and coverage. The big question that hasn’t been looked at before is to better understand the experiences of users so that pre-existing services can be integrated into the new system without increasing wait times or travel distances too much.

Passengers on a BRT bus in Dar Es Salaam

In many cities, existing privately-provided public transportation services have been told they had to shut down or be restructured because they would compete with the new BRT line. That means users no longer have a “one seat” ride—they can no longer get all the way to their destination without transferring.

What cities have you looked at regarding BRT implementation?

We are looking at five cities: Capetown, South Africa; Baranquilla, Columbia; Quito, Ecudaor; Jakarta, Indonesia; and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

We’re focusing on second-tier cities, not the big cities of four million or more that are able to stage pretty good BRT, typically along with underground rail. Smaller cities, especially those in developing countries, just don’t have the same resources so they struggle to provide quality public transportation service. This is where BRT has a potential advantage because it is cheaper than rail, or at least it should be. But cities need very strong leadership and the right political moment to allow large swathes of public roads to be set aside to make Bus Rapid Transit competitive and beneficial. That transition is fiscally cheaper than developing either an underground or above-ground elevated public transportation system. But politically it’s very difficult to do and we don’t have a formula for solving that problem anywhere.

Are you seeing any trends or patterns emerging between BRT systems?

We’ve found there are actually more similarities than there are differences in the way that BRT has been implemented. This is partly because cities have similar issues, but it is partly because they are applying the BRT concept without customizing it to their needs. So far we think there are three main lessons learned, which have to do with how the systems are geographically structured to meet existing transport flows; how pre-existing operators are integrated with the new BRT service; and how the systems compete with the push to automobility in developing cities.

Bus corridor in Quito, Ecuador

BRT is typically set up in terms of trunk and feeder lines in which a BRT line runs in and out of some center of activity, with other lines running out to residential centers. The planning process tends to focus on which corridors to choose and then how to get people to stations on those trunk lines.

In Baranquilla, they want to expand but it’s hard to make money to cover costs. Similarly, in Capetown, they are running one main line that serves an apartheid-era township on the outskirts of the metropolitan area. Phase 2 is currently more of an express bus. Again funding is an issue. These things can take time to work out. Quito started 30 to 40 years ago and they now have three different BRT lines. It happens to be a long narrow city so in a way it’s perfectly set up for BRT because it is already a corridor. Geography to some extent dictates whether a BRT system works well or not.

Another big difference between cities implementing BRT is in the nature of the relationship between existing operators and agencies trying to newly provide public transportation. There is a lot of variance on how powerful the operator consortia are. Some of them have political power and that changes the equation when it comes to figuring out how to regulate and what types of deals to offer to existing paratransit or private transportation operators to get them to participate with the new BRT or keep their services in some way. One response is to bring in some existing minivan drivers to drive new vehicles on the new BRT lines and pay out the rest to retire their vehicles.

In case of Capetown, all three operators were bought out for large amounts of money when negotiating the contract. In Baranquilla the consortia wasn’t as established and there was a reduction in service because there weren’t big payouts. There has been a lot of research done on payment contracts and they play a role in whether resulting services can provide similar service than the previous one.

The physical and institutional structure of the system sounds critical for success. Can you explain the other challenge of automobility?

Every transit investment in the world is pushing against the tide of “automobility”, which is the use of the automobile as the major means of transport.

Recently, there has been a huge boom in motorcycle ownership across Latin America. This is largely because motorcycle prices have come down, whether they’re being manufactured in Latin America or bought cheaply from Asia. With a motorcycle, you can get anywhere cheap and fast, so unless you’re right on a trunk line, there’s no reason to use BRT. The same thing is happening to some extent in Capetown, although there it’s strictly about auto ownership. This is the case pretty much everywhere else around the world too.

In Ecuador, there is a huge subsidy for petrol which makes it ridiculously cheap to drive. Even Quito’s well developed public transportation isn’t as fast as automobiles and taxis for most trips, and partly because auto use is so cheap, transit fares can’t be charged anywhere near what the system costs. That creates a negative spiral in which the system can’t be maintained and may eventually fall apart. Without high gas taxes, the cost of automobility is artificially low and public transit starts off at a deficit.

Another problem in Quito, Barranquilla, Capetown, and elsewhere is land use. Regulations promoting low-density new developments that require a lot of parking mean there isn’t sufficient population density to retain an ongoing market for public transportation. Significant reform is needed on the land use regulation side of the equation.

Are there any lessons from your case studies that other cities could learn from?

All these cities are learning at the same time. Frankly, BRT has been sold as a cure-all to many places but more cities have become aware of having to be much more strategic with how they bring in pre-existing operators when creating BRT plans. For example, Jakarta had a lot of competition and not enough planning on their lines, so it was a terrible system. They are now remedying that by not making decisions without the input of paratransit operators.

BRT is really just one piece of a larger transportation network. There is so much that is specific to each individual metropolitan area, but everything comes down to various kinds of resources: especially human capital and time. There will be less of those in cities struggling with other issues, rather than those that are strongly connected with the global economy and have the funding to attract people with better education and more experiences.

So much is context-specific but there are some basics: you have to involve users and residents of neighborhoods in the planning processes so that the systems put in place are serving people well.

This interview is the part of a partnership series between ITDP, Meeting of the Minds, and Volvo Research and Education Foundations (VREF). In this series, we will feature interviews with researchers from VREF’s Future Urban Transport program. The original interview conducted by Meeting of the Minds can be foundhere.

New ITDP Study Measures Percentage of Residents Who Live Close to Rapid Transit, A Major Factor in Limiting Climate Change and Making Cities More Equitable

Many of the world’s most important cities are expanding rapidly without adequate transportation planning, according to a new report released today by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). The report measures the number of urban residents who are within a short walking distance to rapid transit with a new metric, People Near Rapid Transit (PNT), and applies the metric to 26 major cities and their greater metro regions around the world. Of the cities surveyed, the city of Paris earned a perfect score and the metro regions of Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles were among the worst.

Click image for download page

“The PNT metric illustrates how unplanned urban and suburban growth focuses on automobiles and only those who can afford to drive,” said Clayton Lane, ITDP’s chief executive officer. “Washington, DC, Paris, and Beijing are major examples of cities that have expanded beyond prescribed political boundaries without effective regional transport plans. Larger integrated rapid-transit networks serve more people and limit climate change—but they don’t grow without foresight and planning.”

The PNT metric was established by ITDP researchers to measure the number of residents who live within 1 km of rapid transit. The report, People Near Transit: Improving Accessibility and Rapid Transit Coverage in Large Cities, released in advance of the United Nations’ HabitatIII conference, applies the metric to 26 cities around the world with high-capacity mass transit systems and the greater metropolitan regions anchored by these cities.

Increasingly, the outlying regions of cities are home to less wealthy communities. A recent report from the Brookings Institution found that the poor population in US suburbs grew faster than anywhere else in the country, surging 64 percent in the past decade. Similar trends have already emerged in most countries around the world. Without a corresponding increase in rapid transit access, the poverty in these areas becomes entrenched, as the lack of transportation limits access to jobs and education in other parts of the cities.

Very few cities are investing in the rapid transit systems that serve the less wealthy communities living outside of the urban core, even in Europe and especially in North America. For the 13 cities in industrialized countries that were scored, the average PNT was 68.5%, while those cities’ metropolitan regions averaged 37.3%. The metro regions of the six US cities averaged a score of 17.2%.

“Mass transit systems should grow as cities grow; yet in most cities, governments still rely on automobile traffic as the primary way of getting people around,” noted Lane. “In today’s megacities, road space is already massively congested with car ownership presently at only 10-30 percent, yet building more roads remains a misguided top infrastructure priority. Governments need to better serve the other 70-90 percent of the population without cars, and provide better mobility choices for everyone.”

The rapid transit systems of Seoul and Beijing, the two largest cities in the survey, served the most people by far. Almost 11 million people live within 1 km of each system and their scores reflect the population density.

For the cities measured in low- and middle-income countries, the average PNT score was 40.3%, while the metropolitan regions averaged 23.7%. Of these cities, the rapid transit systems in Jakarta and Quito did not extend past the city borders. Almost all of the other systems only served a small fraction of the population living in these outlying areas.

“In many cities, it’s far too easy for municipal governments to ignore the problems on the other side of their borders,” Lane observed. “But cities today do not exist in a vacuum. All metropolitan regions have an urban core, as well as surrounding communities. People in the outer regions cannot thrive without better transportation connections to the core and other outer communities. Government relationships across city and state lines are crucial to meeting the needs of their populations.”

A Critical Tool in Efforts to Limit Climate Change

Expanding and optimizing rapid transit is also critical to achieving climate change targets. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, cars, light trucks and SUVs generate one-fifth of all carbon dioxide emissions in 2014 that result from burning fossil fuels in the US.

Governments cannot limit these emissions without rapid transit and compact urban development. In a report released two years ago that ITDP produced in collaboration with the University of California, Davis, researchers estimated that more than $100 trillion in cumulative public and private spending, and 1,700 megatons of annual carbon dioxide (CO2)—a 40 percent reduction of urban passenger transport emissions—could be eliminated by 2050 if the entire world expands public transportation, walking and cycling in cities.

“The impacts from climate change could still be mitigated if there is enough political will,” concluded Lane. “The continuing construction of car-oriented development found in metropolitan regions all over the world is a perfect example of this tragedy. Rapid transit integration, including rail, bus, cycling, walking, and shared car networks could connect these places sustainably to a wealth of opportunities.”

Site Visit Busway is a program based in Jakarta, Indonesia aimed at promoting the city and their BRT system, Transjakarta. Transjakarta started operations in 2004 and is one of the longest BRT systems in the world. As of January 2016, the ridership is 320,000 passengers per day. This program, spearheaded and executed by ITDP Indonesia staff members Yoga Adiwinarto, Anggi Siregar, and Ria Roida Minarta Sitompul, is open to the public but specifically targeted towards children between the ages of 7 – 14. Its aim is to introduce young people to BRT as a mode of transportation from an early age. It is also designed as a way to show the community how Transjakarta can be used to visit many Jakarta tourist attractions. On the trip, the participants are taken on a Transjakarta tour where they learn about the BRT system and the stories behind each tourist attraction along the Transjakarta corridor.

Some of the stops on the Transjakarta corridor include the National Museum at Monas station, the Balai Kota (City Hall), and the Fatahillah Museum in Kota Tua (Old Batavia area). While Site Visit Busway provides tours for people from diverse backgrounds, ITDP Indonesia hopes to provide more tours with a variety of routes for underprivileged children in Jakarta who have not had the chance to travel with the BRT system.

Ten years after becoming Asia’s first BRT, TransJakarta is still growing and improving. The city continues to add routes, buy new buses, and expand services to create a stronger network for users. Most recently, the system opened the first of several redesigned stations, built to fit more people and be more comfortable than previous designs.

The new station, Karet Baru, replaces two adjacent stations that until recently served corridor 1, the original TransJakarta corridor. At 45 meters long and 5 wide, the new station is large enough to accommodate more people than both original stations combined. With six doors in each direction, the new station has room for two buses to dock simultaneously, allowing boarding and alighting at double the speed.

In addition, the new station features an open design, with a waist-high glass fence around the platform, rather than full walls. The design maximizes air circulation and natural light, making the station more comfortable for passengers waiting to board the bus. Previously, many TransJakarta stations continued to follow the more narrow, walled design adopted from Bogota’s TransMilenio when the system was first built. But Jakarta’s tropical climate calls for more fresh air and more space for the station’s 6000 expected daily users.

The station is largely based on a design drafted by ITDP as part of a TransJakarta system evaluation last year. As part of recommendations for improved services and increased routes, ITDP suggested a new station design. Despite enthusiasm from the government for plans for new direct service routes and redesigned stations, budget constraints at the time prohibited many of the recommendations from being implemented at the time. In 2013, Jakarta began work on a new metro system (MRT). When MRT construction caused the temporary closing of several BRT stations, the city saw an opening to rebuild the stations incorporating many of ITDP’s suggestions. Construction started in April 2014 and the new station opened in mid June.

With the Karet Baru station successfully implemented, the design is likely to be replicated for many stations as they are updated and expanded. The city already has plans to take advantage of disruptions caused by the Jakarta MRT to update two more stations with this design (Bundaran Senayan and Polda Metro Jaya). Sarinah and Tosari stations, both along the original TransJakarta corridor, will also be expanded to accommodate increases in passengers.

A rendering shows plans to redesign streets to improve NMT access to public transit in low income neighborhoods. Source: ITDP Indonesia

Ten years after the system first launched, TransJakarta continues to expand and improve its services for all of Jakarta’s citizens. Through new routes to high-income areas and plans for increased accessibility in low-income areas, TransJakarta aims to maximize the benefits of BRT by creating a system that meets the diverse needs of city residents.

Joko Widodo, the Governor of Jakarta, recently announced the opening of 20 new bus routes for TransJakarta, with a focus on routes that will reduce the number of cars on the city’s streets. The buses will connect some of the city’s older, more elite housing complexes with the BRT corridor, allowing Jakarta’s wealthier residents to easily access the full extent of the system’s network. The Governor was hopeful that this strategy would persuade middle-to-upper class workers to switch to public transportation, saying, “The buses are convenient. We expect residents to switch from private cars to TransJakarta buses.” Two of the new routes have already begun operation, with the goal of 20 routes focused on vehicle-reduction opening in the near future.

Encouraging wealthier residents to use BRT is an important part of reducing both congestion and emissions. For higher-income riders, BRT provides a comfortable, accessible, efficient system that save time and effort. The TransJakarta buses will reach higher-income residents near their homes, then enter the dedicated bus lanes to cut through Jakarta’s busy streets. This maximizes the benefits of the system by making it easier to commute and more attractive to reduce the use of a personal vehicle.

Image 2: ITDP is working to improve access to public transit in low income neighborhoods Kampung Bali and Kebon Kacang. Source: ITDP Indonesia

At the same time, ITDP is helping TransJakarta reach out to lower-income residents. A new project exploring non-motorized transit (NMT) around TransJakarta stations will look at accessibility in low-income neighborhoods and recommend ways to improve the system’s reach in these areas. Currently, pedestrian and NMT access to stations in many neighborhoods is lacking, due to insufficient sidewalks or pedestrian pathways.

For example, ITDP Indonesia is looking at the low-income areas of Kampung Bali and Kebon Kacang in central Jakarta (Image 2, left). Although there are three BRT stations nearby along the busy Thamrin Street, the low-income housing is largely blocked off from those stations by luxury shopping malls, office towers and South Asia’s largest textile market (Tanah Abang). Insufficient pedestrian pathways force area residents to dangerously walk in the streets alongside cars and motorbikes, or take their own motorbike or paratransit taxi to public transit. ITDP Indonesia is developing plans (see rendering, above) for high-quality sidewalks, bike lanes, and improved signage to reduce the barriers low-income residents face in safely reaching public transit. The project, supported by the Ford Foundation, will continue in Jakarta, as well as many other ITDP cities, to link the city’s low-income areas to high-quality transit.

For lower- and middle-income users of public transit, BRT offers a low-cost, efficient way to increase mobility around the city. Reduced travel times can increase job opportunities, lower time spent in traffic, and have a significant impact on quality of life. By addressing the barriers low-income residents face in using public transit, such as accessibility and safety, the benefits of BRT can be realized by those for whom it can do the most good.

With 12 lines and 134 kilometers of dedicated lanes, TransJakarta is well poised to bring BRT’s benefits to riders from all backgrounds. Transjakarta is the backbone of public transportation in Jakarta, and system operators, as well as ITDP, are working to extend its reach to all city residents. Under the system’s new management by BUMD, the changes and improvements to routes and accessibility will be streamlined. ITDP continues to support TransJakarta as it improves its services for all of Jakarta’s residents.

Transjakarta has finally changed its institutional status from a government agency to a city-owned enterprise, or BUMD (for its acronym in Bahasa Indonesian). The shift in management follows ITDP Indonesia’s longstanding recommendation to the Jakarta city government, and is intended to increase the performance of the Transjakarta BRT. The transfer of responsibility to BUMD will improve Transjakarta’s management, allowing the organization to be more flexible in managing its funding, recruiting staff, and investing in infrastructure improvements. Previously, these activities were restricted by government regulations, limiting the system’s potential to grow and improve.

Transjakarta is the only full-scale BRT in Indonesia. First opened in 2004, it has since expanded several times, most recently adding line 12 in February 2013, and grown to become the largest, most extensive BRT network in the world with 889 buses carrying more than 370,000 passengers daily. All lines are rated basic, bronze or silver by the BRT Standard, and services continue to improve.

A map of the current and planned Transjakarta routes.

The success of creating BUMD is the result of a 3 year consultation process between the City Government and the City Council. ITDP was a key player in this process from the beginning, including drafting the white paper for the regulation, assisting with the legal review of the draft regulation, creating the business plan and investment plan for Transjakarta, and participating in an expert panel during the consultation process with the council.

The move into BUMD has many benefits. The newfound freedom will allow Transjakarta greater flexibility to recruit the best candidates for CEO, the Board of Directors, as well as top experts and professionals. By building a team drawn from experts in other local rail and mass transit systems, Transjakarta hopes to find innovative ways to improve intermodal connections. Transjakarta was previously managed by a sub-unit under the auspices of the Jakarta Transportation Agency. The shift will allow Transjakarta to manage its budget more effectively, and opens up new options for fare restructuring.

The transition process is just getting started with the selection process of CEO and Commissioner, and is expected to continue through the first half of 2014. Through this process and the resulting institutional changes, residents of Jakarta will begin to see many improvements to the system and a vibrant new era for Transjakarta.

In early 2013, the head of the Jakarta Transportation Agency announced that parking would be better managed in Pasar Baru—a popular, historic shopping area that draws hundreds of local and regional customers each week. Parking in Pasar Baru is everywhere: along curbsides, on sidewalks, perpendicular to streets and in scattered in setbacks. Motorbikes outpace private cars in parking demand—with nearly one third of the on-street motorbike parking supply inside the Pasar Baru pedestrian zone. ITDP is collecting baseline data to help assure the success of the new scheme that the government decides to implement. A pilot on-street payment project in Pasar Baru could help roll out a better payment collection system across all of Jakarta.

On-street parking is run by a loose collection of independent operators known as “blue guys,” alluding to their blue uniforms. To prevent trouble, drivers have little choice but to pay them an unregulated fee. The blue guys direct cars into a parking space and also serve as perceived security for the car or motorbike. Drivers leave their vehicles in neutral so the blue guys can push them around to make more space and maximize profits, if possible. Often drivers need to negotiate the parking price with blue guys when leaving a space—as payment is always made at the end. The general cost is 2,000-3,000 Rupiah, but the true charge is left up to the discretion of the blue guys. Drivers sometimes pay a higher than anticipated cost to avoid confrontation and argument.

Enforcement of parking, a challenging task in most developing countries, is handled by three groups: the transport agency, police and a semi-private security bureau under the Mayor’s office known as Linmas. Resale of cars presents a problem for enforcement, as it becomes difficult to track registration. The Transportation Agency is tasked with patrolling and cracking down on illegal parking, yet they have no legal right to issue fines. The police, and Linmas have the authority to do this as well, but never do. Shopkeepers pay Linmas monthly to provide security to the area, but the Limnas guys also accept kickbacks for parking—thereby allowing for the quality of the shopping district to erode, especially in the pedestrian zone.

Improving parking management in Pasar Baru presents opportunities to bring high quality greenways and better pedestrian circulation to the district. Shifting some of the on-street parking demand to underutilized public off-street parking garages can be done most immediately with proper pricing and enforcement. The results of ITDPs baseline study will likely demonstrate how this might be most beneficial to the area. In the process, the enforcement challenge will need to be resolved.

Jakarta is a metropolitan city where for the last ten years development has increased very rapidly. Skyscrapers with modern architecture are found in almost every corner of the city nowadays. But there is a noble historic revitalization project underway at the historical site of Oud Batavia or Old Town.

Oud Batavia is situated in the north and west areas of Jakarta, including Sunda Kelapa port and the Old Fish Market. In the 17th century, the Dutch set up Oud Batavia similar to cities in the Netherlands, with a canal known as Grote Rivier (Kali Besar). Fatahillah Plaza is in the heart of this district.

In 2009, the government implemented the first project phase—pedestrian sidewalk improvement—in Fatahillah Plaza. Phase two will continue these improvements to the Grote Rivier area in 2010. The area is also free from cars and motorcycles, in order to bring better air quality for Oud Batavia’s visitors and to reduce the structural vibration that motorized vehicles cause which can damage old buildings. Pedestrianization also encourages visitors and residents to visit many museums located within walking distance of the plaza.

Fatahillah Plaza in Jakarta’s Old TownPhoto: Walter Hook, ITDP

The revitalization plan for Oud Batavia area was initiated by Ali Sadikin, the former Governor of DKI Jakarta, during his tenure from in 1966 to 1977. Unfortunately, the program was not continued by governors who succeeded him, until Governor Sutiyoso relaunched the revitalization of the Oud Batavia as a dedicated program in 2005. Revitalization work has been ongoing since 2005. The project began with the replacement of with 300 meters of road surface andesite stones to widen the road. Oud Batavia’s colorful evening lighting scheme and additional trees near the pedestrian plaza area have made the district more pedestrian friendly.

Revitalization is not only about physical changes, but also public participation in maintaining the site. In order to create public participation and to boost economic development of the area, the city administration and British Council signed an agreement to support local arts events in the next three years. The program is aimed to promote Jakarta as a creative city and to encourage visitors to come to the site.

According to Aurora Tambunan, deputy governor for the culture and tourism affairs, the pedestrian project is an inducement to attract investors to revitalize the Oud Batavia. As a cross-sector project, municipal departments involved included the Public Works Agency, the Urban Park Agency, the Urban Planning and Spatial Agency, the Transportation Agency, and the Culture and Museum Agency.

Managers of shopping malls in Jakarta and surrounding areas promised to provide bicycle parking. “I agree with the community of cyclists that the managers of buildings in Jakarta and surrounding areas need to provide bicycle parking. We promised to provide it and it was not difficult, “said Chairman of the Association of Indonesian Shopping Center Manager Stephen Ridwan told Kompas, Tuesday (25 / 8).

However, Stephen hopes to meet, sit together, and discuss with cyclists in Greater Jakarta community. “Because, security is an issue for us. How can security personnel identify this bike really belong A or B? A bike does not have a license plate number? Security issues are our concern because it is our responsibility, “he said.

According to Stephen, the equipment is now easily stripped from a bike. “This is what makes us be cautious about bike parking,” he said.

Stephen reaffirmed the commitment of the shopping center managers to provide bicycle parking. “The space is not as wide. Parking costs are not as expensive as for cars and motorcycles, “he said.

Meanwhile, Director of Communications for Hotel Borobudur Jakarta Fika Kansil, said since the last two years has been providing bicycle parking.

Governor Fauzi Bowo requested building management to provide bicycle parking. Fauzi asked the Jakarta parliament to prepare special rules about for this parking.

Jakarta Secretary Muhayat states they are preparing bicycle parking as a feeder to the busway, including the stations at Kalideres, IRTI Monument Square, Kampung Rambutan, and Ragunan.

We use cookies for analytics and to improve our site. You agree to the use of our cookies by closing this message box or continuing to use our site. To find out more, see our updated Privacy Policy. Accept